| Popis: |
PurposeMeat consumption is higher than health recommendations, but little is known about potential moderating factors in rural areas. Informed by the theory of planned behaviour (TPB), this paper explored potential moderators amongst rural residents.Design/methodology/approach The authors summarized meat-related attitudes (importance, taste preference, healthfulness perceptions), social norms, controls (availability, affordability, self-efficacy) and frequency of consumption (overall, lean meat, wild game) in a cross-sectional survey of rural, adult, US volunteers (n = 572). The authors examined correlations and differences by gender, connection to hunting and to livestock raising.Findings These rural residents had positive attitudes toward meat, high family expectations to consume meat and daily consumption. Half of the meat consumed was lean but was infrequently wild game. Respondents with connections to hunting or raising livestock reported more positive meat-related attitudes, norms and self-efficacy, and more frequent meat consumption. Those with a connection to hunting also had higher perceived availability, affordability and consumption of wild game.Research limitations/implications Strong meat preferences and expectations may hamper moderation amongst rural residents, particularly in households connected to hunting or raising livestock. Dietary advice can be tailored to respect meat consumption, emphasize the identification and selection of lean meats and highlight wild game as a lean meat that is moderately available and affordable. Future research should disentangle hunting and livestock raising as potential factors in food choice and examine wild game consumption in jurisdictions where it can be sold legally.Originality/value This study was novel in examining meat-related practices amongst rural residents, separately examining lean meats and wild game, and identifying hunting and livestock raising as important predictors. |
